What happened to the 4:3 aspect ratio?

File: Surface-Book-hero-970-80.jpg (67KB, 970x545px)

67KB, 970x545px

>>56932360
Still here.

>>56932360
Media consumption happened.

>>56932360

Manufacturers figured out it was easier to pump out panels from the same place they produce TV panels and consumers are dumb.

Same reason 16:10 died despite being superior.

>>56932383
On business devices?

>>56932383
This.
>>56932378
thats 3:2 anon which is far superior

>>56932386
>mfw still use my 16:10 screen from 2008

it's glorious

>>56932360
Mediatards too lazy and impulsive to use a television with a set top box took over the market and catering to them was more profitable.

>>56932386
But TV panels are huge. Do the panel making machines come with a fixed aspect ratio but variable size or what?

>>56932391
mass media consumption made 16:9 the most common and cheapest option, businesses clung onto the lowest bidder.

>>56932360

It's like fashion.You cannot use something that's "out of style" for at least 20-30 years or so.

4:3 will maybe return but it will be a while.

>>56932443

While I'm not familiar with the specifics of manufacturing it would seem so. I can definitely confirm 16:10 was phased out because manufacturers wanted to save money and only produce 16:9 panels for every type of device. One factory for all.

>>56932399
>Still using my 16:10 2560x1600 Dell
Fucking love it.

Literally only Apple makes 16:10 laptops now.

>>56932443
I'm reasonably sure that it's because they just order huge panel parts and then subdivide them into smaller displays. I imagine 16:10 or 4:3 wouldn't cut very nicely out of a 16:9 panel.

I do miss 4:3
Wish there were more good 16:10

Asus still makes 1920x1200 desktop displays, even with a CCFL for its superior color gamut.

>>56932386
except 16:10 isn't dead, monitors with that aspect ratio are still being made

>>56932507
1440x1080 instead of 1440x900 or 1920x1080
1920x1440 instead of 2560x1440
I could live this life. But it all went down with people not wanting black bars on their movies/series.

File: Panasonic Lets Note CF-RZ4.jpg (3MB, 4912x3264px)

3MB, 4912x3264px

>>56932480
>Literally only Apple makes 16:10 laptops now.
Panasonic does

File: p3.jpg (94KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 800x800px

>>56932360
Eizo makes a 1:1 display
1920x1920 @ 27"

>>56932360
im still waiting for the A3/A2 ratio.

>>56932360
Useless in desktop.

It's good in laptops but most people nowadays use those for general media anyways.

File: 1449787798962.jpg (52KB, 590x337px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 590x337px

>>56932641

>>56932360
Well there is the Chinese X62 mod by 51nb if you're a risk-taker...

>>56932551
Component phosphor white LEDs have better gamuts these days (without the weird effects of RGB backlighting)

File: LG-Curved-Monitor-34UC97-2[1].jpg (1MB, 1920x1109px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1109px

>>56932641

> Not 21:9 master race

File: 1474985255358.jpg (19KB, 222x208px)

19KB, 222x208px

>>56933342
>21:9

File: 18[1].jpg (65KB, 700x284px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 700x284px

>>56933351

> I like bezels being in the way while I'm multitasking

>>56933342
Man, I see these as being absolutely awful outside of their specific uses like the one pictured

>>56932386
>16:10 died
yeah no.

>>56933362
I do. Different monitors for different tasks. I'd only ever get a 21:9 monitor if I wanted a dedicated screen for modern movies, so never.

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (394KB, 1920x1080px)

394KB, 1920x1080px

>>56933367

I know /g/ has a hardon for "production over consumption", but 21:9 is also solid for viewing 2.35:1 to 2.40:1 movies since you won't have horizontal letterboxing (that takes up 25% of your viewing area when you watch a 2.35:1 movie on a 16:9 screen).

It's also pretty great for games since you'll have a more immersive image.

Really though even if you never touch any form of visual media whatsoever they're worth it just for multitasking alone (seeing excel running on an ultrawide monitor is also hilarious).

>>56933362
Now try using 2 spit windows.
>16:9 allows 1 page + browser window
>21:9 allows 1 page + slightly larger browser window
21:9 is only good for single application use, not really productive imo unless you manually resize windows

>>56933603

Literally any modern 21:9 monitor supports multi-display/multi-desktop, so you can not have to worry about manually resizing windows. You can even hotkey it and switch between formats.

Now try knowing what you are talking about before you post, newfriend.

>>56933654
So then whats stopping me from using multi display on a 16:9? My point is that ultrawides are still not wide enough